About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
MSNBCW 12
MSNBC 11
CNNW 3
CNBC 2
CNN 2
LANGUAGE
English 36
Search Results 0 to 35 of about 36 (some duplicates have been removed)
? the pentagon. >> we're only a few weeks away from this. >> it doesn't make any political sense. >> it would be brutal for everybody. >> devastatiing effects on the economy. >> pushes us into a second recession, something so terri e terrible -- >> all right. settle down. >> they recognize that the sequester is a bad idea. >> i don't like the sequester. >> we see the republicans playing games. >> this is the wrong time for sequest sequestration. >> both sides are sort of okay with it. >> doing nothing is easier than doing something. >> republicans say cuts but no taxes. >> these cuts cost job. >> they don't even want to talk about it. >> who are the monsters who came up with the sequestration idea? >> guess what, they all support it. congress put it into place to force themselves to agree. >> dumbe esest blame game in washington. >>> it's time for another round of republican would you rather. we'll call this the sequester edition. today's question, would you rather go up against al qaeda or grover norquist? republican senator lindsey graham said al qaeda would love the defense cuts in the se
out to the pentagon for comment but have not heard back yet. nick robertson is following developments in london. is this the same drone that the united states said was returned to the united states? >> it looks like the same one. the iranians say it was flying 140 miles into their airspace off their northeastern corner, close to the border with afghanistan. the iranians are saying this aircraft was flying from the kandahar airfield base inside afghanistan, and some of the footage, and i looked at it, some of it could be kandahar air base but there's no guarantee this video came from the aircraft in question here. did they get this video from somewhere els? it's not clear. there's no way to verify at the moment what the iranians are saying. the spokesman that the iranians are putting forward says that the aircraft was sent to california several times in 2010 for repair and used for operations inside pakistan. >> translator: this aircraft has had many flights in countries around iran, operations that have taken place in pakistan. this aircraft provided guidance. >> again, no indications
with us. nbc's chief correspondent. what are you hearing at the pentagon. >> officials knew this was coming although they didn't know the exact timing. this one has set off alarm bells, particularly because of the size of the blast. we're not relying on north korea claims here. south korea's seismic readings on the blast said it was somewhere about 6 or 7 kilotons, which could make it anywhere from 3 to 6 times more powerful than any previous weapon they set off before. north korea did claim they did this with a much smaller warhead, which would indicate they could be making progress miniaturizing a missile that could be launched at the united states. that's north korea and nobody is taking that seriously at this point and quite frankly, that's impossible to prove. within minutes, it seemed, after the blast was reported, the white house responded and president obama called it a highly provocative act that undermines regional stability and threatens ultimately u.s. national security. the president said it demands swift and credible action by the international community. that'
? >> at the pentagon. >> this is the first time hearing of this. when did this happen? did they make this decision on the cruise ship? >> no. no, they didn't. it actually happened in washington. >> really? that's fascinating. >> which is its own permanent port-a-potty. >> okay. mika, for those of us that were just sitting there looking at a cruise ship for 24 hours instead of following the real news, why don't you catch us up with what actually happened yesterday in the news. >> republicans blocked a vote yesterday that would have ended the debate and allowed for a final decision one way or another. democrats fell just shy of the votes needed to advance the process. something president obama chalked up to partisan politics. >> there's nothing in the constitution that says that somebody should get 60 votes. there are only a handful of instances in which there's been any kind of filibuster of anybody for a cabinet position in our history. and what seems to be happening -- and this has been growing over time -- is the republican minority in the senate seem to think that the rule now is that you have
them to be moved from the cia back to the pentagon. but the fact is that there has been something like a 700% increase in the use of drones under president obama as compared to george w. bush. >> and andrea, as you know, from your sources at the agency and i know from my sources not only from the agency but in the entire intelligence community when barack obama came into office, they specifically said, they wanted to ramp up drone operations. and they wanted there to be a side-by-side comparison of how many strikes bush did versus how many strikes they did. for brennan to say that he wants to pull back on drone strikes, that's just -- that's just not accurate. and that's not what's been happening since january 20th, 2009. you can go back. and when the history is written, you will go back to january 20th, 2009, and see a very deliberate -- >> executive orders. >> executive orders. and again, i think most americans probably support this policy. so it's not like i'm talking about anything that's going to be scandalous. most people will support the president doing this. but it obviously ca
's following all these developments for us this morning from the pentagon. barbara, good morning. >> reporter: good morning, soledad. all about spice and drones this morning, isn't it? well, this video has not yet been confirmed as the genuine article by the administration, the pentagon or the cia but it's getting a lot of attention. if you look at it, it's perhaps not so compelling itself, but there's plenty to try and figure out. let's get to that in a minute. but i want you first to listen to -- we translated some of the voice on the tape describing what you're looking at. have a listen. >> translator: this air craft has had many flights in countries around iran. in operations that have taken place in pakistan, this aircraft has provided guidance. >> reporter: so a claim there of u.s. spying on iran and that's really what this is all about. if this is the genuine article, the key question for u.s. intelligence agencies will be what technology now is actually in iranian hands, what do they know and what are they planning to do with it. >> all right, then let's talk about the drone program u
out of federal programs and the pentagon. 800,000 civilian employees have been told by the defense department that they will likely be placed on unpaid leave. with the house and senate still in recess, a number of democrats are calling for congress to reconvene to deal with this mess. secretary of state john kerry, meanwhi meanwhile, is reminding his former colleagues that actions here at home do have global implications. take a listen. >> it is often said that we cannot be strong at home if we're not strong in the world. but in these days of a looming budget sequester that everyone actually wants to avoid, or most, we can't be strong in the world unless we are strong at home. my credibility is a diplomat, working to help other countries create order is strongest when america, at last, puts its own fiscal house in order. and that has to be now. let's reach a responsible agreement that prevents these senseless consults. let's not lose this opportunity because of politics. >> you know, mike barnicle, politics is such a cruel, cruel game. seriously. there's one guy that gets to the to
. they don't receive combat pay and it's absolutely ridiculous. so recently, the pentagon established that a woman that serves in combat is entitled to receive all of the things that go with it to show our country's appreciation. so it seems to me that if we're going to have a draft and i really believe that if we did have a draft set up that congress would not be so anxious to the democrats and republicans to put our young people in harm's way. >> tell me why you say that because you're introduced this legislation multiple times and it's clearly something you're very committed to. you bet your life because the people in the congress that allow these things to go on, they have no fear that anyone in their community and their families are going to be making any sacrifice at all. less than 1% of americans, most of whom volunteer for economic reasons paid the price in terms of 6600 lives lost, tens of thousands of people wounded. veterans, american veterans coming home, disoriented, unemploy unemployed, some homeless and no one pays a price. i submit to you, we would not be in iraq, afgh
the pentagon which is why the sequester idea was terrible. it's a choice between higher tacks and lower military spending. i don't know who agreed to that. the president likes that choice. >> even if congress would get together and give him the authority to change the areas we cut, even though we stay at the same dollar line, you would be of the opinion he would want to cut the military? >> absolutely. i think we will have the sequestration. i think the objective should be as soon as we can get military spending back up where it should be and cut domestic spending more deeply. >> former ambassador to the united nations, john bolton. great to see you. have a great weekend. >> thank you. >> remember the mayor and fired himself when the town was broke? he says it's not his fault he's illiterate. and did george washington really chop down a cherry tree? we have three minutes to study up because we are taking a history test. brian is getting behind the podium. that makes me nervous. are you cheating? >> what is this about george washington and me staying behind the podium? >> bite out of an
the pentagon. like don't cut a single thing, but i'm going to go out, i'm going to keep talking about rich americans. i'm going to keep talking about corporations. i'm going to play to my base instead of talking -- telling middle-class americans they're going to have to make some sacrifices. along with the rich. it's that mika, it's a permanent campaign. and i guess if this is how he wants to run things, he's president of the united states, good luck over the next 3 1/2 years. >> i don't understand why loopholes are even an argument, first of all, why he has to go this far. why he has to keep talking about it. >> hold on a second. >> i know. >> we all agree that these loopholes need to be closed. >> well, let's do it. why is it so hard? >> i've been talking about supporting warren buffett's idea. >> why are we still talking about it? >> because the president only uses it to demagogue in a permanent campaign. he never talks about the other side of it. he always says oh, it's the rich. >> that would be loopholes. >> don't tax you, don't tax me, tax the rich guy behind the tree. >> steny hoye
to some of the employees, civilian employees of the pentagon and some other places. the 85 billion in cuts is through the rest of the fiscal year through september 30th and we're not even talking a full year. it's 50/50 between the defense cuts and the discretionary am doestic spending cuts and the warnings that we're hearing from experts on national security are very severe and vehement. they have told us that this will be a very significant damage. >> let's put the list up here, alex. the white house put out this fact sheet yesterday on the most damaging effects of the cuts that are supposed to go into effect march 1st. 17,000 education jobs at risk. 70,000 kids being kicked off head start. nearly 400,000 mentally ill patients not receiving health care and small business loan guarantees being cut up to $540 million, roughly. the white house did not mention the massive military cuts. what was the strategy there? >> well, look. i think that for the white house, the strategy here is to emphasize that basically every american would be impacted in some way. if you emphasize defense cuts and i
as the secretary steps up the rhetoric about dire cuts at the pentagon if sequestration goes into effect march 1. >>> the man accused of trying to blow up the federal reserve in new york expected to plead guilty to terror charges. officials say he tried to blow up the van with 1,000 pounds of explosives outside the buildings, but the explosives were fake. he is charged with trying to use weapons of mass destruction and trying to thwart al qaeda. >> there are thousands of reasons why people are late to work. traffic? the most common culprit. but not all employees blame jammed roads. a new survey reveals some of the most memorable excuses like -- good ideas for you. my car wouldn't start because the breathalyzer showed i was intoxicated. my car was attacked by a bear. here's the photo of proof. are we going to see it? >>steve: we heard it. >>gretchen: last but not least, my angry wife froze my keys in a glass of water in the freezer. come on. out of those three, that is the most logical one. >>brian: really? i tell you what, i think there is a long line of misdeeds if she is going to that extent t
at the white house. he will also be honored at the pentagon on tuesday, after which he will come back here to minot, north dakota, and continue with his new job. meanwhile, the war in afghanistan continues. more than 60,000 american service members are right now in that country fighting that war.. i'm jake tapper for cnn in minot, north dakota. >>> new developments in the all-out man hunt for a suspected cop killer. right now police keting a california indian reservation. >>> and bracing for a snow making monster. a blizzard taking aim right now at the entire northeast. major cities like boston, right here in new york, smash dab in its path. thousands of flights have already been canceled. good morning. welcome to "early start" this morning. i'm christine romans. john berman is off today. >> thanks for joining us, everyone. i'm zoraida sambolin. it is friday, february 8th. it is 5:00 a.m. here in the east. let's get started. millions of people bracing for what could be a blizzard for the ages. take a look at the monster storm that's about to bury boston and bring misery to millions in the
to see you. i wanted to put this up. this is what's on the cover of "usa today." pentagon warns of huge cuts. when you think about what's going on in washington, right now, and you think about the sequester that may or may not happen, and you think about your history in washington, do you think that we will have the sequester? >> andrew, i don't know. i think it's a very complicated situation. i think we had a great opportunity and i actually thought there was some reasonable chance it might happen, which was to have a grand bargain that could have addressed what is really unsustainable and deeply dangerous long-term fiscal situation and i think if we had done that, not only would be useful for the long run but i think could have generated confidence in the shorter run and promote jobs now. now instead of that we have a happen has 5rd process. a sequester we're facing. it's a terrible piece of legislation. it arbitrarily cuts defense and nondefense without thoughtfully doing so. instead of being phased in so we'd have more room for recovery, it hits abruptly. and it's far, far from clea
during the testimony, it was interesting because panetta said the pentagon, the c.i.a., and the department of state were all on board with sending the rebels in syria where there has been mass genocide because ofor us to send them arms. you know who said no? the white house. well, we don't know if it's going to work. we don't know which of the rebels to arm. ultimately we don't know if it will result in the ouster of assad. >> brian: the "washington post" lead editorial today says hillary clinton and david petraeus, running the c.i.a. identified the group that they believe would have been the preferrable group to take over through all the rebels, they weeded through and had a plan. and the president nixed it. the word is too political. they wanted to make it seem we're not on a war footing with the election a month away. >> gretchen: maybe the election playing a huge role. let's look at the fox news polls right now. recently conducted, how many people feel our country compared to five years ago? nearly half of those polled say america is weaker and less powerful to
the sequester in a hurry, then yes, it's a real problem because it doesn't let the pentagon begin to plan and distribute, if you will, the cuts. but at the end of the day, whether it's defense spending, education spending, health spending, what always matters more than how much you spend is how you spend it. and so i'm not, at the end of the day, all that worried about how much we spend, whether it's on defense or anything else. you just want to have the time to make some intelligent cuts rather than have to make them literally in a matter of days which would probably mean that readiness more than anything else would be cut out of the defense department account. and that's probably the one thing you don't want cut out of it. >> sam stein, you're close and yet so far away over there at the jump seat. what are the odds that the sequester actually takes place? we know the president's proposed something to push them back a while. are we going to see these kind of cuts, the ones that were outlined in the sequester proposal? >> i think the odds are pretty high, to be honest. i don't think there
's not going to be any opportunity to cut pentagon spending in any serious way if you don't go over the cliff. so there is some stuff in there that i as a democrat don't like. but i think everybody's going to put something in the pot in order to balance the deficit. we did a lousy job in january on the tax side and i hope that -- i think it's better to go over the cliff than do a lousy job -- >> how many people do you know on your side of the field who actually agree with you? >> very few. look they're politicians. they want to spend as much money as they possibly can and they don't want to pay for it. >> who agrees with you? >> oh, i don't know. i bet -- oh, god, joe agrees with me. >> you forgot. the other thing, howard, and i'm just alluding to it, there will be no return to the bush era tax rates on anyone under $400,000? >> right. >> okay. so take that amount of money, whatever that is per year. how much do you need -- how many loopholes do you need to close? what is the marginal rate have to be on people above 400 to replace that potential revenue? it's 100%, isn't it? >> but i don't --
to oppose his nominees for top cabinet slots at the pentagon and cia. republican senator lindsey graham threatened to hold up those picks until the white house delivers more information about the attacks in benghazi. >> i don't think we should allow brennan to go forward for the cia directorship, hagel to be confirmed as secretary of defense until the white house gives us an accounting, did the president ever pick up the phone and call anyone in the libyan government to help these folks? what did the president do? yes, i'm going to ask my colleagues just like they did with john bolton, joe biden said, no confirmation without information. no confirmation without information. >> you are saying that you are going to block the nominations -- you're going to block them from coming to a vote until you get an answer? >> yes. >> now, john mccain has already think that he doesn't think republicans ought to filibuster this. what will you do? you're just going to put a hold on it? >> yeah, i'm not filibustering. this is a national security failure of monumental proportions, and i'm not going to st
the president for lost funding in federal programs and the pentagon over ten years, should the sequestration take place. house speaker john boehner said, quote, today the president advanced an argument republicans have been making for a year. his sequester is the wrong way to cut spending. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell insisted "more than three months after the november election, president obama still prefers campaign events to common sense, bipartisan action." and joining us now for more on this from washington, the former chief economist of the international monetary fund and bloomberg view columnist, simon johnson. he's the co-author of "white house burning: our national debt and why it matters to you," now out in paperback. simon, good to see you this morning. >> nice to be with you. >> simon, if you could help us through this over the next week or so, it doesn't look like there's a path to avoiding the sequestration if you listen to the two sides. so how damaging would this be? because we've heard a couple different versions of it that would have immediate impacts, more than 75
Search Results 0 to 35 of about 36 (some duplicates have been removed)